What do you think?
Rate this book
Sugrivas Atlas
Unveiling a groundbreaking exploration into one of the Ramayana’s most astonishing chapters, Sugriva’s Atlas reveals a sophisticated understanding of world geography dating back to 14,000 years ago (12209 BCE). Drawing from over 600 astronomical observations, this book challenges conventional history and places scientific inquiry at the heart of BharatiyaItihaas. Discover how Sugriva’s instructions to the Vanarasena astonishingly map the Arctic Circle, polar daylight, aurora borealis, and lands stretching from Uday-giri (modern Chile) to Asta-giri (the Alps)—with accuracy that suggests first-hand exploration, not poetic imagination. Co-authored and meticulously researched, Sugriva’s Atlas is not just a commentary—it is a torchlight for researchers, urging them to move beyond academic consensus and embrace evidence-based analysis. This book blends astronomy, geography, history, and spiritual insight, honouring the sacred depth of our epics while decoding their scientific layers with shraddha and viveka.
222 pages, Paperback
First published November 24, 2025
3 people are currently reading
12 people want to read
About the author
Nilesh Nilkanth Oak
12 books79 followersNilesh Nilkanth Oak is an author, original researcher, TEDx speaker, UAA-ICT Distinguished Alumnus, and sought after keynote speaker. He holds BS and MS in Chemical Engineering and Executive MBA.
He has published 3 revolutionary books: 1. When did the Mahabharata War Happen, 2. The Historic Rama, 3. Bhishma Nirvana. His books have been and are being translated into various other languages. He travels extensively around the world speaking to university and college students and to mainstream audiences. His work has inspired novels, novelettes, documentaries and movies.
Nilesh helps individuals become aware of the deep wisdom and antiquity of Indian civilization so that they truly comprehend, present, or defend the grand narrative of this civilization unlike most other Indic researchers because he builds it through scientific acumen and logical reasoning.
He is a researcher and adjunct faculty at Institute of Advanced Sciences, Dartmouth, Massachusetts, USA.
He has published 3 revolutionary books: 1. When did the Mahabharata War Happen, 2. The Historic Rama, 3. Bhishma Nirvana. His books have been and are being translated into various other languages. He travels extensively around the world speaking to university and college students and to mainstream audiences. His work has inspired novels, novelettes, documentaries and movies.
Nilesh helps individuals become aware of the deep wisdom and antiquity of Indian civilization so that they truly comprehend, present, or defend the grand narrative of this civilization unlike most other Indic researchers because he builds it through scientific acumen and logical reasoning.
He is a researcher and adjunct faculty at Institute of Advanced Sciences, Dartmouth, Massachusetts, USA.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
December 6, 2025
This is the best book on Geography of the world, by a distance. It must be made a compulsory read in every Indian school and college
December 21, 2025
With Nilesh Oak – the man who changed my idea of Indian History (इतिहास: "thus it happened")
The interest of mine in this book was a result of a Nilesh Oak podcast. This book is where epic literature stops being “symbolic geography” and starts behaving like ‘‘deep-time global ethnography’’.
If Oak’s earlier works rattled timelines, ‘Sugriva’s Atlas’ redraws the map itself—quietly, methodically, and with an almost unsettling confidence.
This is not an attempt to prove that ancient Indians “knew the world” in some vague, chest-thumping way. Oak does something far more dangerous to lazy skepticism: he shows that Valmiki’s Ramayana preserves a coherent, internally consistent, geographically and anthropologically accurate memory of the world as it existed around 14,000 years ago—at the end of the Pleistocene, when ice, oceans, and land were constantly shifting.
And he does it through one deceptively humble narrative device: ‘‘Sugriva’s directions’’.
Let’s start with the conceptual genius of the idea itself. Atlases, as we know them, are modern artifacts—paper, projections, scales, legends. But Oak asks: ‘what if an atlas existed before paper, encoded instead in narrative instructions, mileposts, cultural markers, and ecological cues?’
That’s exactly what Sugriva’s speech to the vanara armies is.
Sugriva is not mythologizing. He is ‘‘briefing search parties’’.
In the Ramayana episode Oak focuses on, Rama and Lakshmana—having lost Sita—ally with Sugriva after the killing of Vali. The monsoon arrives, ferocious and unavoidable. Oak promises, elsewhere, climatological evidence for how extreme the monsoon was 14,000 years ago—and even without that detour, the pause itself makes sense.
Then, when the rains recede, Sugriva summons his vast network and divides it into ‘‘four directional expeditions’’: east, west, north, and south.
This matters. Civilizations that do not understand the world do not send search parties in four global directions with confidence.
And leaders who do not possess ‘‘prior geographical knowledge’’ do not give detailed route instructions.
Sugriva does.
Oak’s brilliance lies in refusing to treat this as allegory. He asks the most basic, devastatingly simple question: ‘what exactly does Sugriva know?’
And once you ask that, the text opens like a locked archive.
The focus here is the ‘‘eastward journey’’, from India to the Andes—but crucially, ‘‘not the east of today’s maps’’.
Oak repeatedly reminds us that geography is not static. Fourteen thousand years ago, sea levels were between ‘‘120 and 240 meters lower’’ than today. Continental shelves were exposed.
Land bridges existed. Islands were peninsulas. Sri Lanka was attached to India. Indonesia was a continuous landmass. Alaska and Siberia were joined.
In other words, the world was ‘‘walkable’’ in ways modern readers instinctively forget.
Sugriva’s descriptions make sense only in this context.
Oak reconstructs a late-Pleistocene Earth where travel from India through Southeast Asia into Polynesia and onward to South America is not only possible but ‘‘topographically coherent’’.
And here’s where modern science, inconveniently for sceptics, keeps backing him up.
Genetic studies—like the Harvard-led research Oak cites—show a ‘‘statistically significant genetic trail’’ stretching from India through Southeast Asia, Polynesia, parts of Australia, and into South America.
This is not fringe data. This is mainstream population genetics. Archaeology independently confirms ‘‘human presence in South America as early as 33,000 BCE’’, with newer evidence in places like Panama pushing habitation back toward ‘‘50,000 BCE’’.
Columbus, as Oak dryly implies, was laughably late to the party.
Now here’s the kicker: Sugriva’s narrative ‘‘matches this eastward human trail’’—not with modern place names, but with ecological, anthropological, and geological markers.
Rivers, mountains, metals, animals, peoples’ physical features, dietary habits, and ornamentation—all appear as navigational checkpoints.
Sugriva is essentially saying: ‘if you’re going the right way, this is what the world will start looking like’.
That’s atlas logic.
The Sanskrit verses Oak highlights are especially revealing. Sugriva instructs the vanaras to traverse mountains and oceans, to recognize regions by distinctive peoples—elongated ears, altered lips, iron-like faces, single-footed figures, raw fish eaters, tiger- or lion-faced beings.
For generations, commentators waved these off as fantasy. Oak does something radical: he ‘‘puts them next to ethnography’’.
And suddenly, the “mythical” starts looking awkwardly familiar.
1. Ear elongation? Still practiced in parts of Indonesia and Southeast Asia.
2. Lip plates? Found in Africa and South America.
3. Jaw inserts? Documented among tribes in Brazil.
4. Facial ornamentation altering perceived anatomy? Anthropologists have entire libraries on this.
Oak isn’t saying these groups are unchanged fossils of the past. He’s saying ‘‘the cultural logic persists’’—and that Valmiki’s descriptions are observational, not imaginative.
Even the “wanara” themselves deserve reconsideration. Oak hints—carefully, without sensationalism—that tails may have been ‘‘added appendages’’, cultural or functional tools rather than biological traits. In other words, “wanara” need not mean monkey-men.
It may describe forest-dwelling humans with distinctive gear and identity markers. Once again, the text becomes anthropological, not zoological.
As the expedition moves eastward, Sugriva names places that Oak correlates with Thailand, Java (‘Yavadvīpa’), Indonesia, the “island of gold” (‘Suvarna-dvīpa’). Gold is not a poetic metaphor here.
Archaeological maps—some dating back over 2,000 years—show precisely where ancient gold mines existed in Southeast Asia and Indonesia. Even today, island emblems, names, and symbols in Indonesia preserve Sanskritic linguistic fossils.
Indonesia’s national motto—’Bhinneka Tunggal Ika’ (Unity in Diversity)—is not a modern invention. It is civilizational memory.
This is one of the book’s quiet triumphs: it shows that ‘‘Indic cultural influence did not spread through conquest’’, but through shared civilizational grammar—language, symbolism, cosmology. Oak never claims empire. He shows ‘‘connectivity’’.
Then comes the Pacific.
Sugriva’s instructions do not end at Southeast Asia. They explicitly cross the ‘Śīrodadhi’—the great eastern ocean, identifiable as the Pacific. Beyond it, Sugriva warns of terrifying beings called ‘Mandeha rakshasas’—dark, stone-coloured creatures hanging from cliffs, attacking living beings, dropping at sunrise, repeatedly destroyed by sunlight.
Oak’s identification here is audacious and disturbingly precise: ‘‘vampire bats’’.
Not bats in general—those exist worldwide—but ‘‘blood-feeding bats’’, which are exclusive to South America. Their behaviour, habitat, and physiological features align almost uncannily with Sugriva’s description.
Again, Oak does not say Valmiki “knew biology.” He says Valmiki ‘‘recorded what travellers reported’’.
And then—because Oak never stops at plausibility—he brings archaeology into the frame.
On the west coast of Peru, near Paracas, stands the famous ‘‘Candelabra of the Andes’’—a massive geoglyph etched into coastal rock, visible from sea and land.
No one knows who built it. Local traditions say it was “always there.” Spanish chroniclers were baffled. Mainstream archaeology shrugs.
Valmiki doesn’t.
Sugriva describes, at the eastern terminus, a ‘‘three-branched structure’’ (‘Trishira’), golden, established on a square base (‘Vedabhūmi’), created by ‘‘Indra’’ to mark the ‘‘eastern direction’’, during ‘‘Krita Yuga’’.
Beyond it rise the snow-covered ‘‘Udaya Parvata’’—the rising mountains.
Oak makes the connection explicit: the Andes are the ‘‘Udaya Parvata’’. The Paracas geoglyph is a ‘‘directional marker’’, not a religious idol. A civilizational signpost.
Is this speculative? Yes. Is it random?
No. Oak does not say “this proves it.”
He says: ‘this explains it better than anything else we currently have’. And that’s a disturbingly strong position.
One of the most intellectually honest aspects of ‘Sugriva’s Atlas’ is Oak’s willingness to explain ‘‘what Sugriva does NOT describe’’.
The Atlantic. North America. Why? Because 14,000 years ago, much of the North Atlantic world was buried under ice sheets.
The map Oak includes—showing glaciation across Europe, Russia, the Atlantic, and North America—makes Sugriva’s silence logical.
You don’t describe places you can’t access.
That absence becomes evidence.
The philosophical implications are enormous. If Oak is even partially right, then the Ramayana is not merely an epic—it is a ‘‘Pleistocene memory map’’, preserved through oral transmission with astonishing fidelity.
The Vedas already suggest such continuity: ‘yad bhūtaṃ yac ca bhavyam’ — Atharva Veda - What has been, and what will be.
This is where Oak’s work intersects with modern astronomy and geology in spirit, if not always explicitly. Astronomers accept ancient eclipse records as valid data. Geologists reconstruct ancient coastlines.
Geneticists trace migration routes. Oak’s provocation is simple: ‘‘why are literary records excluded from this triangulation?’’
Shakespeare, of all people, offers the perfect frame. In ‘The Tempest’, he writes of lands “not honoured with a human shape.” Early Europeans mistook unfamiliar cultures for monsters.
Oak flips that lens: what if ancient Indians described unfamiliar cultures with the same limited vocabulary, without denying their humanity?
Language doesn’t lie; interpretation does.
By the time you finish ‘Sugriva’s Atlas’, the question is no longer “Did Sugriva really travel to the Andes?” The real question becomes: ‘‘how much of ancient human history have we misread because we assumed our ancestors were less observant than we are?’’
Oak never claims omniscience for the ancients. He claims ‘‘competence’’. And that is revolutionary enough.
The book closes not with triumph but with invitation. East to Andes is only Part One. West to Alps, north to Arctic, south to Antarctica await.
The atlas is incomplete—not because it is flawed, but because the journey continues.
Low-key? This book breaks your mental Mercator projection.
High-key? It forces literature, science, and history into the same room—and locks the door.
And honestly? Once you see the Ramayana this way, you can’t go back to calling it “just a story.”
Sugriva wasn’t boasting.
Valmiki wasn’t fantasizing.
They were remembering a world larger than ours—and trusting the future to listen.
Fourteen thousand years later, Oak is listening.
And the map is finally starting to make sense.
Most recommended.
The interest of mine in this book was a result of a Nilesh Oak podcast. This book is where epic literature stops being “symbolic geography” and starts behaving like ‘‘deep-time global ethnography’’.
If Oak’s earlier works rattled timelines, ‘Sugriva’s Atlas’ redraws the map itself—quietly, methodically, and with an almost unsettling confidence.
This is not an attempt to prove that ancient Indians “knew the world” in some vague, chest-thumping way. Oak does something far more dangerous to lazy skepticism: he shows that Valmiki’s Ramayana preserves a coherent, internally consistent, geographically and anthropologically accurate memory of the world as it existed around 14,000 years ago—at the end of the Pleistocene, when ice, oceans, and land were constantly shifting.
And he does it through one deceptively humble narrative device: ‘‘Sugriva’s directions’’.
Let’s start with the conceptual genius of the idea itself. Atlases, as we know them, are modern artifacts—paper, projections, scales, legends. But Oak asks: ‘what if an atlas existed before paper, encoded instead in narrative instructions, mileposts, cultural markers, and ecological cues?’
That’s exactly what Sugriva’s speech to the vanara armies is.
Sugriva is not mythologizing. He is ‘‘briefing search parties’’.
In the Ramayana episode Oak focuses on, Rama and Lakshmana—having lost Sita—ally with Sugriva after the killing of Vali. The monsoon arrives, ferocious and unavoidable. Oak promises, elsewhere, climatological evidence for how extreme the monsoon was 14,000 years ago—and even without that detour, the pause itself makes sense.
Then, when the rains recede, Sugriva summons his vast network and divides it into ‘‘four directional expeditions’’: east, west, north, and south.
This matters. Civilizations that do not understand the world do not send search parties in four global directions with confidence.
And leaders who do not possess ‘‘prior geographical knowledge’’ do not give detailed route instructions.
Sugriva does.
Oak’s brilliance lies in refusing to treat this as allegory. He asks the most basic, devastatingly simple question: ‘what exactly does Sugriva know?’
And once you ask that, the text opens like a locked archive.
The focus here is the ‘‘eastward journey’’, from India to the Andes—but crucially, ‘‘not the east of today’s maps’’.
Oak repeatedly reminds us that geography is not static. Fourteen thousand years ago, sea levels were between ‘‘120 and 240 meters lower’’ than today. Continental shelves were exposed.
Land bridges existed. Islands were peninsulas. Sri Lanka was attached to India. Indonesia was a continuous landmass. Alaska and Siberia were joined.
In other words, the world was ‘‘walkable’’ in ways modern readers instinctively forget.
Sugriva’s descriptions make sense only in this context.
Oak reconstructs a late-Pleistocene Earth where travel from India through Southeast Asia into Polynesia and onward to South America is not only possible but ‘‘topographically coherent’’.
And here’s where modern science, inconveniently for sceptics, keeps backing him up.
Genetic studies—like the Harvard-led research Oak cites—show a ‘‘statistically significant genetic trail’’ stretching from India through Southeast Asia, Polynesia, parts of Australia, and into South America.
This is not fringe data. This is mainstream population genetics. Archaeology independently confirms ‘‘human presence in South America as early as 33,000 BCE’’, with newer evidence in places like Panama pushing habitation back toward ‘‘50,000 BCE’’.
Columbus, as Oak dryly implies, was laughably late to the party.
Now here’s the kicker: Sugriva’s narrative ‘‘matches this eastward human trail’’—not with modern place names, but with ecological, anthropological, and geological markers.
Rivers, mountains, metals, animals, peoples’ physical features, dietary habits, and ornamentation—all appear as navigational checkpoints.
Sugriva is essentially saying: ‘if you’re going the right way, this is what the world will start looking like’.
That’s atlas logic.
The Sanskrit verses Oak highlights are especially revealing. Sugriva instructs the vanaras to traverse mountains and oceans, to recognize regions by distinctive peoples—elongated ears, altered lips, iron-like faces, single-footed figures, raw fish eaters, tiger- or lion-faced beings.
For generations, commentators waved these off as fantasy. Oak does something radical: he ‘‘puts them next to ethnography’’.
And suddenly, the “mythical” starts looking awkwardly familiar.
1. Ear elongation? Still practiced in parts of Indonesia and Southeast Asia.
2. Lip plates? Found in Africa and South America.
3. Jaw inserts? Documented among tribes in Brazil.
4. Facial ornamentation altering perceived anatomy? Anthropologists have entire libraries on this.
Oak isn’t saying these groups are unchanged fossils of the past. He’s saying ‘‘the cultural logic persists’’—and that Valmiki’s descriptions are observational, not imaginative.
Even the “wanara” themselves deserve reconsideration. Oak hints—carefully, without sensationalism—that tails may have been ‘‘added appendages’’, cultural or functional tools rather than biological traits. In other words, “wanara” need not mean monkey-men.
It may describe forest-dwelling humans with distinctive gear and identity markers. Once again, the text becomes anthropological, not zoological.
As the expedition moves eastward, Sugriva names places that Oak correlates with Thailand, Java (‘Yavadvīpa’), Indonesia, the “island of gold” (‘Suvarna-dvīpa’). Gold is not a poetic metaphor here.
Archaeological maps—some dating back over 2,000 years—show precisely where ancient gold mines existed in Southeast Asia and Indonesia. Even today, island emblems, names, and symbols in Indonesia preserve Sanskritic linguistic fossils.
Indonesia’s national motto—’Bhinneka Tunggal Ika’ (Unity in Diversity)—is not a modern invention. It is civilizational memory.
This is one of the book’s quiet triumphs: it shows that ‘‘Indic cultural influence did not spread through conquest’’, but through shared civilizational grammar—language, symbolism, cosmology. Oak never claims empire. He shows ‘‘connectivity’’.
Then comes the Pacific.
Sugriva’s instructions do not end at Southeast Asia. They explicitly cross the ‘Śīrodadhi’—the great eastern ocean, identifiable as the Pacific. Beyond it, Sugriva warns of terrifying beings called ‘Mandeha rakshasas’—dark, stone-coloured creatures hanging from cliffs, attacking living beings, dropping at sunrise, repeatedly destroyed by sunlight.
Oak’s identification here is audacious and disturbingly precise: ‘‘vampire bats’’.
Not bats in general—those exist worldwide—but ‘‘blood-feeding bats’’, which are exclusive to South America. Their behaviour, habitat, and physiological features align almost uncannily with Sugriva’s description.
Again, Oak does not say Valmiki “knew biology.” He says Valmiki ‘‘recorded what travellers reported’’.
And then—because Oak never stops at plausibility—he brings archaeology into the frame.
On the west coast of Peru, near Paracas, stands the famous ‘‘Candelabra of the Andes’’—a massive geoglyph etched into coastal rock, visible from sea and land.
No one knows who built it. Local traditions say it was “always there.” Spanish chroniclers were baffled. Mainstream archaeology shrugs.
Valmiki doesn’t.
Sugriva describes, at the eastern terminus, a ‘‘three-branched structure’’ (‘Trishira’), golden, established on a square base (‘Vedabhūmi’), created by ‘‘Indra’’ to mark the ‘‘eastern direction’’, during ‘‘Krita Yuga’’.
Beyond it rise the snow-covered ‘‘Udaya Parvata’’—the rising mountains.
Oak makes the connection explicit: the Andes are the ‘‘Udaya Parvata’’. The Paracas geoglyph is a ‘‘directional marker’’, not a religious idol. A civilizational signpost.
Is this speculative? Yes. Is it random?
No. Oak does not say “this proves it.”
He says: ‘this explains it better than anything else we currently have’. And that’s a disturbingly strong position.
One of the most intellectually honest aspects of ‘Sugriva’s Atlas’ is Oak’s willingness to explain ‘‘what Sugriva does NOT describe’’.
The Atlantic. North America. Why? Because 14,000 years ago, much of the North Atlantic world was buried under ice sheets.
The map Oak includes—showing glaciation across Europe, Russia, the Atlantic, and North America—makes Sugriva’s silence logical.
You don’t describe places you can’t access.
That absence becomes evidence.
The philosophical implications are enormous. If Oak is even partially right, then the Ramayana is not merely an epic—it is a ‘‘Pleistocene memory map’’, preserved through oral transmission with astonishing fidelity.
The Vedas already suggest such continuity: ‘yad bhūtaṃ yac ca bhavyam’ — Atharva Veda - What has been, and what will be.
This is where Oak’s work intersects with modern astronomy and geology in spirit, if not always explicitly. Astronomers accept ancient eclipse records as valid data. Geologists reconstruct ancient coastlines.
Geneticists trace migration routes. Oak’s provocation is simple: ‘‘why are literary records excluded from this triangulation?’’
Shakespeare, of all people, offers the perfect frame. In ‘The Tempest’, he writes of lands “not honoured with a human shape.” Early Europeans mistook unfamiliar cultures for monsters.
Oak flips that lens: what if ancient Indians described unfamiliar cultures with the same limited vocabulary, without denying their humanity?
Language doesn’t lie; interpretation does.
By the time you finish ‘Sugriva’s Atlas’, the question is no longer “Did Sugriva really travel to the Andes?” The real question becomes: ‘‘how much of ancient human history have we misread because we assumed our ancestors were less observant than we are?’’
Oak never claims omniscience for the ancients. He claims ‘‘competence’’. And that is revolutionary enough.
The book closes not with triumph but with invitation. East to Andes is only Part One. West to Alps, north to Arctic, south to Antarctica await.
The atlas is incomplete—not because it is flawed, but because the journey continues.
Low-key? This book breaks your mental Mercator projection.
High-key? It forces literature, science, and history into the same room—and locks the door.
And honestly? Once you see the Ramayana this way, you can’t go back to calling it “just a story.”
Sugriva wasn’t boasting.
Valmiki wasn’t fantasizing.
They were remembering a world larger than ours—and trusting the future to listen.
Fourteen thousand years later, Oak is listening.
And the map is finally starting to make sense.
Most recommended.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews